JAGDISH PASWAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned lawyer for the Respondent Insurance Company is present and both parties have been heard at length.

(2.) This case really depicts a sorry state of affairs both in respect of the Officers manning the Tribunal as well as Officers (Lawyers) assisting such Tribunal.

(3.) An application for compensation as a consequence of motor vehicle accident in terms of Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was filed by the claimants which was registered as Claim Case No. 388 of 2008 before the Motor Vehicle Claims Tribunal, Muzaffarpur presided by the District Judge, Muzaffarpur. He has non-suited the claimants without proper adjudication virtually on the preliminary issue that the claimants do not reside or work for gain within the jurisdiction of Muzaffarpur Court and further that the amendment to sub-section 2 of Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act apparently having been deleted, the claimants' applications could not be entertained at Muzaffarpur.